Consciousness in Science and in Spirituality ~ Julia Mossbridge

Julia Mossbridge explains the semantic problem in defining Consciousness and Non-Consciousness in discussions between science and spirituality.
This interview is part of Science and Nonduality Anthology vol.6. To watch the whole interview, please visit:

[coenterhaar]

When we are awake, whatever we do, say, experience, believe, think, emotions etc. etc., there is something that's aware of all of timeless and beyond understanding, and it's always there, a constant spacious unlimited awareness. Just be still....there is no me that's aware of being still, just awareness aware of itself. When asleep, there is no disappears.... the conditioned and conceptual mind disappears....there is just breathing, a dream appearing and disapearing....There is only this experience of being awake and asleep.

[sngscratcher]

No, mystics don't think neuroscientists are stupid. Rather, mystics think neuroscientists are "unconscious."

[GUPTAYOGENDRA]

Spirituality need not be differentiated from Science.

[sandeepbhanushali]

Refer your statement about non consciousness- you are currently talking as non consciousness state of mind to a different consciousness of observer .

Consciousness abides isolation of the body with mind.

Observer mode uses sense as a tool rather than an individual state of mind

Thank you

[weiqi]

Being unconscious to a "mystic" is also when a negative emotion takes over and a person loses control and loses that connection to being here in the moment and that connection to the energy field, if one is so inclined. In other words, in a fit of anger, we "lose it". An intellectual might be too much in their head to understand where a cultivator is coming from. A qigong cultivator wants to develop abundant physical health, emotional balance, and spiritual growth (the 3 treasures of jing, qi, and shen) through cultivation. Whereas a neuro scientist wants understanding through research etc... as opposed to direct experience on all levels of our being.

[rblvegan]

How does this lady teach remote viewing without understanding and internalizing that consciousness is primary to all existence period. Objective perception and sensation arise in consciousness. Julia how is that possible lmao sorry not sorry

[lnbartstudio]

True it is semantics so far as this statement goes. And to help clear up any confusion, maybe even once and for all, a good book to read and digest would be "Prior to Consciousness: Talks with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj" edited by Jean Dunn. Understanding this wonderful volume gives one the ability to know how and when ( and when to not bother ) to speak with strict materialist reductionist neuroscientists and skeptics of all kinds. William James is a good resource but forget about speaking from the notion of a radical empiricism to any materialist. Life is short.

[jackpullen]

At 1:36, before you switch over, did you not note also that the two processes are going on continuously while being totally unaware? Also, some have the ability to, " Plant a program change", into their dreams, as well even tap parts of creative unconscious abilities, " the minds eye". Down the quantum rabbit hole we go! Thanks!

[devatarah]

Interesting points, Julia. The mainstream concept presented here, however, as the "mystic's" view about consciousness, does not reflect the authentic Buddhist teachings. That distinction needs to be made. Thank you.